Menu
▾
▴
python-ldap-dev
|
From: Sascha G. <sa...@fr...> - 2000-12-12 11:08:32
|
> > In addition, I seek more comment on any more changes that the _ldap > library > > may need to support LDAPv3 connections. (Remember that the purpose of > this > > module is not to give an abstraction of X.500 directory services, but > rather > > to provide an abstraction of the LDAP C API.) So implementing all in pure python isnt the way to go ?. > > Please, comment! So are you still going to handcraft all wrappers by hand ? - I am still using SWIG to get this job done for my environment. Now I have a job to swig myself towards v3 ... > > Yes! I hope this discussion is not "local". ;-) > Well, Dortmund and Karlsruhe might be considered local ;-) > Ciao, Michael. > _______________________________________________ > Python-LDAP-dev mailing list > Pyt...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/python-ldap-dev > -- /* Yeah */ |
|
From: Sascha G. <sa...@fr...> - 2000-12-12 11:58:00
|
[...] > > > > So implementing all in pure python isnt the way to go ?. > > A pure Python implementation would be hard work! I agree ;-) > > Did you release some of your LDAP-related SWIG stuff to the public? Yes, have a look at http://www.free.de/homes/sascha/swig-ldap. > Maybe I missed the announcement. Well using swig-ldap might still be awfull for users of python-ldap, so I wasnt talking to much about it ... >Since python-ldap 2.0 is meant to > be a completely new implementation you're welcome to contribute your > work with SWIG. > Maybe its not as complete as python-ldap but its used in a productive enviroment (solaris 5.5.1 / 7.2 ; freebsd ) and might serve as an interesting example. Bye, Sascha > Ciao, Michael. > _______________________________________________ > Python-LDAP-dev mailing list > Pyt...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/python-ldap-dev > -- /* Yeah */ |
|
From: Michael <mi...@st...> - 2000-12-12 12:07:59
|
Sascha Gresk wrote: > > Yes, have a look at http://www.free.de/homes/sascha/swig-ldap. > [..] > Maybe its not as complete as python-ldap but its used in a productive > enviroment Before we all dive into it can you give a short description of what you think the main advantages are? Ciao, Michael. |
|
From: Gregor H. <gr...@me...> - 2000-12-12 14:49:57
|
David,
> * A new python-ldap-2.0 will be started, with an API that is likely
> to be somewhat incompatible with that of p-l-1.10. In particular,
> the following will be the major compatibility targets:
> + Python-2.0 support (ie unicode)
> + OpenLDAP-2.0 support (ie LDAPv3/LDAP-EXT)
>
> This means that people relying on v2 client/servers should be happy enough
> with a reasonably stable release. And people wanting to live in the 3rd
> millenium should be happy with a version (relatively) free of legacy
> support.
When you write 'Python 2.0 support' and 'free of legacy support', does this
mean that this new version won't work anymore with Python 1.5.2 ?
Gregor
|
|
From: Michael <mi...@st...> - 2000-12-12 14:59:43
|
Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > > + Python-2.0 support (ie unicode) > > When you write 'Python 2.0 support' and 'free of legacy support', does this > mean that this new version won't work anymore with Python 1.5.2 ? Not sure how David will comment. My personal opinion is that python-ldap 2.0 should make direct use of the new Unicode objects in Python 2.0 (I dropped Python 1.5.2 in web2ldap because of this). If we can provide normal string support and Unicode support at the same time without producing a code bloat then we could keep Python 1.5.2 support. If it gets too messy personally I would like to drop support for non-Unicode Python versions since migrating to e.g. Python 2.0 isn't that hard anyway and Unicode objects are so handy... Ciao, Michael. |
|
From: Michael <mi...@st...> - 2000-12-12 15:08:04
|
Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > When you write 'Python 2.0 support' and 'free of legacy support', > does this mean that this new version won't work anymore > with Python 1.5.2 ? Additional note: The old python-ldap 1.10.x will be properly released. The new python-ldap 2.0 will be incompatible to old applications anyway (just like the new OpenLDAP 2.0.x API based on LDAP-EXT is not compatible to the old OpenLDAP 1.2.x API based on RFC1823). Ciao, Michael. |
|
From: David L. <dav...@cs...> - 2000-12-16 09:06:00
|
On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Gregor Hoffleit typed thusly: > David, > > > * A new python-ldap-2.0 will be started, with an API that is lik= ely > > to be somewhat incompatible with that of p-l-1.10. In particul= ar, > > the following will be the major compatibility targets: > > + Python-2.0 support (ie unicode) > > + OpenLDAP-2.0 support (ie LDAPv3/LDAP-EXT) > > > > This means that people relying on v2 client/servers should be happy eno= ugh > >=A0with a reasonably stable release. And people wanting to live in the = 3rd > > millenium should be happy with a version (relatively) free of legacy > > support. > > When you write 'Python 2.0 support' and 'free of legacy support', does th= is > mean that this new version won't work anymore with Python 1.5.2 ? yes... is that a problem? d --=20 David Leonard Dav...@ds... CRC For Distributed Systems Technology Room:78-632 Ph:+61 7 336 58358 The University of Queensland http://www.dstc.edu.au/ QLD 4072 AUSTRALIA B73CD65FBEF4C089B79A8EBADF1A932F13E= A0FC8 Cassette tapes have an almost unlimited capacity for data. - Commodore 64 Programmer's Reference Guide (1983) |
|
From: Gregor H. <gr...@ho...> - 2000-12-17 12:39:06
|
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 07:05:53PM +1000, David Leonard wrote: > On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Gregor Hoffleit typed thusly: > > When you write 'Python 2.0 support' and 'free of legacy support', does this > > mean that this new version won't work anymore with Python 1.5.2 ? > > yes... is that a problem? No fatal problem, just a sort of inconvenience: It's a longer story... Due to the GPL problems with the new Python license, Debian will provide and maintain both Python 1.5.2 and Python 2.0 packages. It's on the maintainer of a package depending on Python to decide if the license of his package allows to be used with Python 2.0, or if he has to stick with Python 1.5.2 if he doesn't want to infringe the license. Users of third-party Python code will have to make the same decision. IIRC, quite a few services inside Debian are using python-ldap (http://db.debian.org/), e.g. for maintenance of the maintainer database. I'm not sure which sorts of code are involved there, and if they were ready to switch to Python 2.0, but if I would prefer to provide them with a python-ldap package which works on both 2.0 as well as 1.5.2. But if that's not feasible, I can simply split the package and stick with the old legacy code as python-ldap for 1.5.2 and provide the new code as python2-ldap. Gregor |
|
From: Michael <mi...@st...> - 2000-12-17 14:04:12
|
Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > > IIRC, quite a few services inside Debian are using python-ldap > (http://db.debian.org/), e.g. for maintenance of the maintainer > database. I'm not sure which sorts of code are involved there, > and if they were ready > to switch to Python 2.0, but if I would prefer to provide them with a > python-ldap package which works on both 2.0 as well as 1.5.2. I think the old python-ldap package will still exist and bugfixed => the old applications have a properly working module to run with. BTW: This module also works with Python 2.0 => no problem for http://db.debian.org/ at all. > But if that's not feasible, I can simply split the package > and stick with the old legacy code as python-ldap for 1.5.2 > and provide the new code as python2-ldap. Yes, I would prefer that everyone considers the new python-ldap-2.0 (or python-ldap-ext?) to be a completely separate package. Ciao, Michael. |
|
From: Sascha G. <sa...@fr...> - 2000-12-13 08:30:46
Attachments:
why-swig.txt
|
> > Before we all dive into it can you give a short description > of what you think the main advantages are? > + interface file is smaller and hopefully easier to maintain + data structures convert to objects in a convenient way + support for ruby, perl, guile wont be to different - limits hard core hacking of the interface - swig does not currently parse every conceivable type of C declaration See attachment for some more information. %Sascha -- /* Yeah */ |
|
From: Michael <mi...@st...> - 2000-12-12 11:26:09
|
Sascha Gresk wrote: > > > > to provide an abstraction of the LDAP C API.) > > So implementing all in pure python isnt the way to go ?. A pure Python implementation would be hard work! I played with an ASN.1 decoder/encoder module for a while. Even building the messages is not easy but think of all the schema handling and syntax checking - not to speak of SSL/TLS ... > > > Please, comment! > > So are you still going to handcraft all wrappers by hand ? - I > am still using SWIG to get this job done for my environment. > Now I have a job to swig myself towards v3 ... Did you release some of your LDAP-related SWIG stuff to the public? Maybe I missed the announcement. Since python-ldap 2.0 is meant to be a completely new implementation you're welcome to contribute your work with SWIG. Ciao, Michael. |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X